Tamper Evident Packaging Patents: Leaders & Filing Trends 2026
A data-driven look at tamper evident packaging patents: who leads filings, how the technology mix breaks down across IPC classes, and where filing activity is headed through 2026.
Filing growth = 2021 (27 records) → 2024 (10); 2024 is the last year we treat as complete. Top-5 share = the 5 largest assignees ÷ all 1,075 records in scope (CR5), not the ranked leaders only.
What the tamper evident packaging patent record shows
Tamper evident packaging spans closures, reactive indicator layers, tear strips and reclosable systems, and the claim activity sits almost entirely inside B65D container and packaging classifications. The dataset covers 1,075 published records filed or published between 2015 and 2026, drawn from a search string that targets tamper-evident terminology in titles, claims and abstracts across packaging-classified filings.
Filing activity peaked in 2020 and has declined through the most recent complete year, 2024, though publication lag of roughly 18 months means 2025 and 2026 figures will keep filling in and should not be read as a slowdown yet. Ownership is moderately concentrated at the top, with a handful of assignees holding a meaningful share of records and a long tail of smaller filers behind them.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trend and technology composition
The two views below cover the same 1,075 records in scope: one tracks filings by year, the other breaks the same set down by IPC subclass. Because a single record can carry several IPC codes, the class shares add to more than 100% of the record total.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Filings rose from 30 in 2017 to a peak of 49 in 2020, then fell across the following complete years, dropping 63% from 27 in 2021 to 10 in 2024. 2025 and 2026 are still partial due to publication lag and should not be compared directly to earlier complete years.
Publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 onwards are still filling in. Growth rates on this page therefore end at 2024; running them to the last bar would understate the field.
IPC subclass composition
B65D dominates at 95.1% of the 1,075 records in scope, consistent with the search scope itself. Below that, B65B packaging and wrapping (13.8%), B32B laminates (7.0%) and B31B carton making (6.0%) show where secondary claim activity concentrates, while A45C, G09F, B29C and A61J each sit under 5%, marking narrower or newer application areas.
Shares are the percentage of the 1,075 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Tamper Evident Packaging Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about tamper evident packaging patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaRepresentative filing and most-cited prior art
US20040050740A1 — Tamper evident packaging system with reactive indicator layer
A tamper evident packaging system including a tag attachable to a package comprising a substantially oxygen impermeable upper barrier layer, a reactive intermediate layer including a reactive material changeable between an un-reacted condition in the absence of oxygen and a reacted condition in the presence of oxygen to produce a visible colour change, and a lower layer which can be a substantially oxygen impermeable lower barrier layer or an integral part of the package.Filed by Chroma Chem (TEP) Pty Ltd, published 2004-03-18.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US8963714B2 | Tamper-evident packaging | 1,000 |
| 2 | US6056141A | Reclosable packing system | 318 |
| 3 | US4487324A | Tamper-evident dispensing closure | 221 |
| 4 | US20130126379A1 | Tamper-evident packaging | 216 |
| 5 | US5882749A | Easy-opening reclosable package | 200 |
| 6 | US4537312A | Child-resistant tamper-evident package | 167 |
| 7 | US20020067264A1 | Tamper Evident Radio Frequency Identification System And Package | 164 |
| 8 | US20100278454A1 | Tamper-evident laminate structure | 163 |
| 9 | US4721210A | Tamper-evident package | 159 |
| 10 | US5456928A | Tamper-evident, flexible, reclosable package | 155 |
Citation counts are drawn from within this searched corpus and skew toward older filings that have had more time to accumulate citations; treat them as a signal of influence rather than of current commercial relevance.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Put your own technology through the same analysis
Eureka on the web
When you want the answer in the next five minutes.
The agent works the prompt against patents and technical literature, citing every source.
Run your analysis now →MCP server & REST API
When it has to run inside your own pipeline.
Patent search, landscape analysis and assignee resolution as MCP tools. Drop them into any agent framework, or call REST directly.
Browse MCP servers →What the numbers mean for a filing decision
Three patterns in the data matter more than the raw counts: how concentrated ownership is at the top, how the filing curve has moved since its 2020 peak, and how unevenly the technology is spread across IPC classes.
Concentration is real but not extreme
The five leading assignees together hold 21.0% of all 1,075 records in scope, and the top 10 extend that to 32.7%. That leaves roughly two-thirds of the field spread across the rest of the ranked leaders and unranked filers, so a new entrant is not filing into a market owned by one or two players.
Activity has cooled from its 2020 peak
Filings peaked at 49 in 2020 and fell to 10 by 2024, a 63% drop over that three-year span. Because publication lag runs about 18 months, the 2025-2026 figures are still incomplete and should not be read as confirming a continued decline.
Claim density sits almost entirely in one class
B65D containers and packaging covers 95.1% of the 1,075 records, while B65B, B32B and B31B form a secondary tier between 6% and 14%. Classes like A61J medicine containers (2.7%) and G09F signage (3.0%) carry far fewer filings, which is a sign of thin claim coverage rather than technical difficulty.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to tamper evident packaging patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| Sonoco Development, Inc. | HUFFER SCOTT | 3 |
| Sonoco Development, Inc. | DAVIS BENJAMIN | 2 |
| Sonoco Development, Inc. | ADAMS ANGELA HURST | 2 |
| Reynolds Consumer Products Inc. | TOMIC MLADOMIR | 2 |
| Pactiv LLC | Reynolds Presto Products Inc. | 2 |
| N.V. Nutricia | VAN PUIJENBROEK ALEXANDER JOSEPHUS MARICUS | 2 |
| Closure Systems International, Inc. | SADIQ SOHAIL | 1 |
| Closure Systems International, Inc. | MOLL WILLIAM | 1 |
Only 10 co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, and the strongest pairing recurs at a handful of filings, indicating that most tamper evident packaging patents are filed by a single assignee rather than through joint development arrangements.
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a field with a defined leadership tier, a cooling filing curve at the top, and technology coverage skewed heavily to one IPC class. The next steps below turn that into a working position.
Map the white space in adjacent classes
A61J medicine containers and G09F signage each carry a small share of records relative to core B65D packaging, suggesting under-claimed combinations worth scoping before committing to a core-class filing.
Explore white space in EurekaTrack the leading assignees' recent activity
With the top 5 assignees holding 21.0% of records, watching their most recent publications is a faster signal of direction than the aggregate filing trend alone.
Set up assignee tracking in EurekaStress-test a design-around against the most-cited claims
The most-cited records in this field, several exceeding 200 citations, define the claim boundaries most designs will need to clear.
Run a claim comparison in EurekaFrequently asked questions
The dataset covers 1,075 published records filed or published between 2015 and 2026. Filing activity peaked in 2020 at 49 records for that year, then declined across each following complete year, reaching 10 in 2024, a 63% drop from the 27 filed in 2021. The 2025 and 2026 figures are still incomplete because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so the most recent years will keep rising as more records publish.
Ownership is moderately concentrated: the top 5 assignees together hold 21.0% of all 1,075 records in scope, and the top 10 extend that to 32.7%. That still leaves the majority of filings spread across the remaining ranked leaders and a longer tail of smaller or single-filing entrants, so no single company controls the field outright. Reviewing the current assignee ranking directly is the most reliable way to see which organisations are most active today.
Almost all records, 95.1% of the 1,075 in scope, carry a B65D containers-and-packaging classification, since that class anchors the search scope itself. Secondary activity clusters in B65B packaging and wrapping (13.8%), B32B layered laminates (7.0%) and B31B carton making (6.0%). Smaller shares appear in A45C bags, G09F signage, B29C plastics shaping and A61J medicine containers, each under 5%, pointing to narrower or emerging application areas rather than heavily contested ground.
Filings dropped from a peak of 49 in 2020 to 10 in the last complete year, 2024, a 63% decline over that three-year window. That is a genuine cooling trend through the most recent complete data, but it should not be extended to 2025 or 2026: publication lag of roughly 18 months means those years are still filling in and will understate true filing activity for some time yet.
US20040050740A1 describes a tamper evident tag built from an oxygen-impermeable upper barrier layer, a reactive intermediate layer that changes colour when exposed to oxygen, and a lower layer that can itself be a barrier or part of the package. Anyone designing a similar oxygen-triggered visual indicator system should review its specific layer construction and claim scope closely, since it sits inside the same B65D-classified space as most of the field's most-cited records. It is one representative filing among many, not the field's dominant patent, so a full freedom-to-operate review should also check the higher-cited records in the same corpus.
Research Tamper Evident Packaging Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole tamper evident packaging patent landscape corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.
Disclaimer. This page is generated from Patsnap Eureka data drawn from a limited snapshot of global patent and scientific-literature records, and is provided for general information and reference only.
Patent data carries inherent limitations: recent filings (typically the most recent 18–24 months) are under-counted due to standard publication lag; counts may be reported at either a patent-family or a patent-record basis and are not always directly comparable; classification, applicant-name, and citation data may contain errors, duplicates, or omissions; and the underlying search query defines and constrains the scope shown. As a result, the analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate and may not reflect the full technology landscape.
Nothing on this page constitutes an exhaustive prior-art, novelty, freedom-to-operate, or validity search, nor does it constitute legal, financial, investment, or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Any patent, commercial, or strategic decision should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent, legal, and domain professionals. Patsnap makes no warranties, express or implied, as to the accuracy, completeness, or fitness for any particular purpose of the information presented.
Machine translation. Assignee and organisation names originally recorded in Chinese, Japanese or Korean have been rendered into English by an AI translation step so that the tables stay readable. These renderings are best-effort and may not match a company’s registered English name; the original name is what the underlying patent record carries, and it is what any Eureka query launched from this page uses.